MovieChat Forums > Home Alone (1990) Discussion > The franchise should have stopped at 2`

The franchise should have stopped at 2`

posted 6 years ago by George (650)
15 replies | jump to latest

Let me tell you why. We are used to Kevin. I agree that in 1997 he was too old to be home alone. But a sequel to have different characters, isn't what is appealing to most people. I mean 1 and 2 were great. Why did they need a sequel? Also I wouldn't want a sequel where Kevin is in his 80s and unable to take care of himself and being left home alone accidentally. That would not be appealing to me. I mean this would be more depressing than funny. Because if you see Kevin at an old age, unable to take care of himself, you will say to yourself "what if I am in that condition when I am in my 80s? " I don't think that a sequal where Kevin is a grandpa will work and I told you why. Therefore it should have stopped at 2.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7985) 6 years ago

I agree. The 3rd one is more of a remake. Never bothered seeing 4 or 5.

[–] George (650) 6 years ago

Don't waste your time seeing 4 and 5. You will doing yourself a favor by not seeing 4 and 5. They should have made a remake instead of a sequel. And even a remake wasn't necessary either. By the way did you enjoy the third one?

[–] Stratego (31078) 6 years ago

I think there should never have been even one sequel. But yeah, the others suck even more.

[–] George (650) 6 years ago

2 wasn't bad. 2 was also very good. I mean in the first one he got his wish to make his family disappear. In the second one, he wanted to go on vacation alone. And he got his wish. 3-5 were more like remakes than sequels.

[–] Stratego (31078) 6 years ago

No, 2 was perhaps not so bad you can't leave it on in the background, but it was not "very good". It lacked the atmosphere and magic of the first movie and the plot was even more far-fetched. And he wasn't even "home alone"! The best thing about the whole movie was probably Tim Curry.

[–] George (650) 6 years ago

Yeah you are right. I mean being home alone and getting on the wrong plane isn't the same thing. Maybe in didn't need a sequel after all. Because he wasn't home alone in New York was he.

[–] Bosdog6777 (817) 6 years ago

He was Home Alone at Unc's House

[–] R_Kane (15828) 6 years ago

Bingo. Replying to Stratego’s post 2 posts above, because “Jimbo”’ and this site’s software is terrible.

[–] csweetleaf2 (3738) 6 years ago

I agree Home Alone 2 was the last good movie of the franchise and it should have ended from there, I also liked that most of the actors returned for Home Alone 2.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Agreed. I don’t even aknowledge 3,4 and 5. I choose to ignore them. They don’t exist.

[–] George (650) 6 years ago

3, 4 and 5 were more like remakes rather than sequels. Also 2, it has nothing to do with being home alone. Lost in New York isn't the same as being home alone.

[–] Bosdog6777 (817) 6 years ago

He was Home Alone at Unc's House

[–] ComputerBlue (330) 6 years ago

Pretty much this, just like cousin eddie's christmas vacation 2, a christmas story 2 etc, Ghostbusters 2016, Karate Kid jaden edition, I like to think they don't even exist.

[–] csweetleaf2 (3738) 6 years ago

While I didn't think Home Alone 2 was as great compared to the classic original but I did find it to be a very good sequel to the classic original film, I agree they should have left it at 2

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7985) 6 years ago

This topic reminds me that when I was inside my local Walmart at Christmas time they had this movie set of all 5 Home Alone movies on DVD. I automatically thought, "Who'd want to buy that?"